The End Of School Discipline By Design

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
Last edited:

Ras

Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2015
Messages
930
I was raised in a Christian school that paddled, sent to detention, and zero-graded its belligerent, incorrigible students. Most of our students went home to loving, nuclear families whereat they could expect another paddling from their father, if not also the loss of privileges. Until the report-slip and demerit system of high school, we had a tally system called HOW-I-ACT: a posterboard at the front of the room that bore blue, felt shields that represented each student; below the shields was a row of paper cups that held small, colored squares of felt that would be placed on the child's shield when he did wrong. Each square of colored felt stood for a fault:

H - Hullabaloo: for being loud, when expected to be silent
O - Out of order: for being out of place or acting out, when otherwise instructed
W - Work not in: for not completing and turning in assigned work without an acceptable excuse
I - Intentional disobedience: the black tally
A - Attitude: for behaving with an improper attitude towards authority and fellow students
C - Communication: for speaking in a way unbecoming a good Christian
T - Talking: talking, when otherwise instructed

These were sometimes combined at once, when the student called for it. Five tallies or one black tally earned you a trip to the principal's office and a Grade-AA paddling: boys by the male principal, and girls by his wife. Five days without a tally got you a gold shield; a continual week with a gold shield allowed you to take it home and receive another to replace it in class. Tallies and gold shields were delivered before all classmates in a ceremonial fashion, to maximize shame or glory.

We had a very well-behaved studentry.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
"We just need more funding for education!"
Hahaha!

I mean, get it right first. Then the funding will follow. Or maybe there is already enough funding. It may just be misallocated.
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
1,045
Obama isn't the problem.
Discipline isn't the problem.

Schools are the problem.
Child reading is the problem.

A well raised child will not be violent even in the most boring or petty school environment.

A good school will be stimulaying and engaging. It will not be conducive to the kind of environment where things like this happen.

Op you've gotten wrapped up in the bipartisan trap of **** Obama or **** Trump. Snap out of it.
 

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
Obama isn't the problem.


A well raised child will not be violent even in the most boring or petty school environment.

This is just false man. Boys like to fight. Hierarchies dude. A well raised boy won't tolerate boring and petty, and good for him.
 
OP
Queequeg

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
Obama isn't the problem.
Discipline isn't the problem.

Schools are the problem.
Child reading is the problem.

A well raised child will not be violent even in the most boring or petty school environment.

A good school will be stimulaying and engaging. It will not be conducive to the kind of environment where things like this happen.

Op you've gotten wrapped up in the bipartisan trap of **** Obama or **** Trump. Snap out of it.
No, no matter how good the parents raise their children, the day after day exposure to poorly behaving children makes all children behave poorly. This has been proven in double blind studies which Dr Jordan Peterson discusses in one of his latest talks. This also explains why most non-violent offenders become much worse violent criminals after a stint in prison.

Read the article I linked to and you will see how Obama, and his idiotic Education Secretary threatened civil rights lawsuits against any school district that expelled black children at a higher rate than their representative proportion. The administrators then decided to stop punishing any of the students for unruly behavior to get their numbers down. Teachers have been told that kids will not be expelled for attacking them unless blood is spilled. It didn't take long for the kids to realize that they could get away with anything.

You misunderstood me. It's not **** Obama or **** Trump but rather both Obama and Trump i.e. representatives of the ruling elite are ****ing us. This would be a good place to start your reducation on education. Schooling System Is Designed To Destroy Children
 
Last edited:
OP
Queequeg

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
This is just false man. Boys like to fight. Hierarchies dude. A well raised boy won't tolerate boring and petty, and good for him.
see above
edit: I agree that there is a difference between boys and girls and boys can naturally be more aggressive but the degree of aggression that is tolerated in schools today is completely unnatural. Its the expected result when you remove all authority from children and allow them to act however they want. Think Lord of the Flies. In a natural setting children's more wild instincts are supposed to be reigned in somewhat by a respected elder who they can then model their own behavior on. Here the teenagers are modeling their behavior on each other in a race to the bottom of who can act the worst to the adulation of their peers.
 
Last edited:

schultz

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
2,653
No, no matter how good the parents raise their children, the day after day exposure to poorly behaving children makes all children behave poorly. This has been proven in double blind studies which Dr Jordan Peterson discusses in one of his latest talks.

I was just about to mentioned Jordan Peterson.

My family has been giving me grief for wanting to "homeschool" my children. One of my feelings about school is that basically your children are being indirectly parented because the other kids at school are passing on the values their parents teach them to your children (if that made sense). Like 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. It's freaking insane if you think about it.

I haven't seen this new talk but it sounds interesting.

What I was going to mention about Jordan Peterson is that he talks about how boys are disagreeable and girls are agreeable, and this is why girls do better in school because they like to follow the rules and stuff. This feature of boys comes in handy when they are CEO's or something and need to boss people around and not worry about what people think of them. Being the boss sometimes means being disagreeable. This is a little different than physically fighting but I thought it was interesting none-the-less and thought @Tarmander was on to something.
 
OP
Queequeg

Queequeg

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
Messages
1,191
I was just about to mentioned Jordan Peterson.

My family has been giving me grief for wanting to "homeschool" my children. One of my feelings about school is that basically your children are being indirectly parented because the other kids at school are passing on the values their parents teach them to your children (if that made sense). Like 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. It's freaking insane if you think about it.

I haven't seen this new talk but it sounds interesting.

What I was going to mention about Jordan Peterson is that he talks about how boys are disagreeable and girls are agreeable, and this is why girls do better in school because they like to follow the rules and stuff. This feature of boys comes in handy when they are CEO's or something and need to boss people around and not worry about what people think of them. Being the boss sometimes means being disagreeable. This is a little different than physically fighting but I thought it was interesting none-the-less and thought @Tarmander was on to something.
If you can homeschool I think you should. Your kids will be much better educated and free from the soul crushing indoctrination of state sponsored worker training.
 

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
I was just about to mentioned Jordan Peterson.

My family has been giving me grief for wanting to "homeschool" my children. One of my feelings about school is that basically your children are being indirectly parented because the other kids at school are passing on the values their parents teach them to your children (if that made sense). Like 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. It's freaking insane if you think about it.

I haven't seen this new talk but it sounds interesting.

What I was going to mention about Jordan Peterson is that he talks about how boys are disagreeable and girls are agreeable, and this is why girls do better in school because they like to follow the rules and stuff. This feature of boys comes in handy when they are CEO's or something and need to boss people around and not worry about what people think of them. Being the boss sometimes means being disagreeable. This is a little different than physically fighting but I thought it was interesting none-the-less and thought @Tarmander was on to something.

"Fight" as in conflict. Boys need conflict whether that be video games or boxing.
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
1,045
When did Jordan Peterson become some sort of groupthink cult leader. Boys like to compete. They like to wrestle and horseplay. They like to win. This does not mean they like to fight. A school system which fosters healthy competition be it sports or martial arts or even chess will show less violence.

As for the violent black kids, that's due to the black communitys horrible culture, their high rate of single motherhood, and their dysgenic mating practices; where the worst men are the most sexually successful.

Obama and Trump have nothing to do with that...
 

Tarmander

Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
3,763
When did Jordan Peterson become some sort of groupthink cult leader. Boys like to compete. They like to wrestle and horseplay. They like to win. This does not mean they like to fight. A school system which fosters healthy competition be it sports or martial arts or even chess will show less violence.

As for the violent black kids, that's due to the black communitys horrible culture, their high rate of single motherhood, and their dysgenic mating practices; where the worst men are the most sexually successful.

Obama and Trump have nothing to do with that...

I mean...call it what you want, conflict, fighting, competition. Basically winners and losers. If they have a good outlet for that it doesn't have to be violent which is what I think youre trying to say.
 

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
I would imagine it has more to do with nutrition and the environment which these kids grow up in and the incredibly dull and depressing environment that modern schools have become. Perhaps a good reason why schooling shouldn't be compulsory. Also Pimpnamedraypeat, When you use the word dysgenic it's an insult to the work of Ray Peat. He has repeatedly talked about how eugenics has more to do with the neonazi politics of people like Konrad Lorenz than actual science.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,883
Location
Manila
What I was going to mention about Jordan Peterson is that he talks about how boys are disagreeable and girls are agreeable, and this is why girls do better in school because they like to follow the rules and stuff. This feature of boys comes in handy when they are CEO's or something and need to boss people around and not worry about what people think of them. Being the boss sometimes means being disagreeable. This is a little different than physically fighting but I thought it was interesting none-the-less and thought @Tarmander was on to something.
Hmmm.

I've struggled with this. I'm surrounded by sisters. When I felt something wasn't right, I was quick to speak out. I'm called hot-headed, undiplomatic. I'm not scared to "fight" for what I deem to be right. I don't fear confrontation for the sake of peace. It has been hard. Recently, I had to overrule the doctor in the hospital. I was the rule-breaker. They were scared of breaking the rule of "The doctor is the expert." I was more "The customer is first."

A friend once told me if he were to have children, he would prefer a boy be the first child. I thought he was being sexist, but the more I thought about it, the more it made sense. If you were to be the leader, you have to have the fight in you. It's no wonder peacemakers don't make good leaders. Carter was a peacemaker, for example. He didn't do well, but no one doubts that he is a good man.
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2014
Messages
1,045
I would imagine it has more to do with nutrition and the environment which these kids grow up in and the incredibly dull and depressing environment that modern schools have become. Perhaps a good reason why schooling shouldn't be compulsory. Also Pimpnamedraypeat, When you use the word dysgenic it's an insult to the work of Ray Peat. He has repeatedly talked about how eugenics has more to do with the neonazi politics of people like Konrad Lorenz than actual science.

I agree with your first part. But the black community does practice dysgenic mating, as seen from the pov of having a stable, well functioning society. The people who do the most reproducing are those that are the least conducive for that.
 

raypeatclips

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
2,555
When I was at school "trouble" kids behaviour varied lesson by lesson. You would have a boring teacher who opted to read lines from textbooks and shouted at the first sign of disobedience and the naughty children would misbehave, basically manufacture excitement in the lesson. We would then change to a different lesson with a teacher that wasn't strict, engaged us all, made us stand up and act out parts of the lesson, laughed at our jokes. You wouldn't be able to pick out who was the trouble kid in the class that was causing the previous teacher just an hour before such stress.

I'm not convinced there are such things as "good students" and "bad students" but more students that will react to the environment more than others.

I don't think misbehaviour would be a thing in an ideal school.
 
Last edited:

Energizer

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
611
I agree with your first part. But the black community does practice dysgenic mating, as seen from the pov of having a stable, well functioning society. The people who do the most reproducing are those that are the least conducive for that.

"Although Konrad Lorenz (who later received the Nobel Prize) was the architect of the Nazi's policy of "racial hygiene" (extermination of those with unwanted physical, cultural, or political traits which were supposedly determined by "genes") he took his ideas from the leading U.S. geneticists, whose works were published in the main genetics journals. Following the Nazis' defeat, some of these journals were renamed, and the materials on eugenics were often removed from libraries, so that a new historical resume could be presented by the profession." -Peat, Eclampsia in the Real Organism: A Paradigm of General Distress Applicable in Infants, Adults, Etc.

As he's saying here, it's quite obviously an ideology based on faulty cultural conceptions, and not a valid scientific model, you can't predict anything based off of it, all you can do is arbitrarily class and stereotype groups of people based on behavior and assume that the genes are responsible, as you are assuming here with the black community.

There's really no way to prove what you're saying, there are probably many reasons why certain communities suffer more than others, and it probably has a lot more to do with social class, economics, nutrition, and their environment, imo. I think it makes more sense to focus on things you can change and observe, rather than things you can't, (ie. genes). You can't measure someone's genes, so trying to correlating their genes with their behavior just doesn't make much sense, and is definitely not reliable. You can't predict someone's behavior well based on what genes they have, how they look, or what genes someone has based on their behavior (excluding the obvious genetic disorders such as Down's Syndrome), so it's not reliable to assume as much. I think many people in mainstream culture still think genes are the most important things, when that's not at all true. I think genes are given far too much credit, and are far less influential, than many seem to believe.

If we want smarter kids, correcting nutritional deficiencies and improving the environment for them should be the focus, not who's mating with who. That's not only unproductive, but completely out of anyone's control (furthermore it would be unethical to try to control that, as in the Nazi experiments), even if the biggest village idiots were having the most kids (which is possible in any community I suppose), the best way to solve that problem is to improve the environment and nutrition for the future generations. Spreading awareness about "Peaty" concepts I think has done a lot of positive for people that are transitioning from miserable health with fad dieting, low carbing, and eating tons of PUFAs. I think Peat mentioned as well in a radio interview that Mexican mothers were told to feed their babies with soymilk by government health agencies as way to reduce costs or something similarly horrendous, I forget exactly what the reason was, but I was kind of shocked to learn that. I think minorities usually get shafted so to speak nutritionally because they have less to spend on good food and usually know less about eating for optimal nutrition.

Anyway, as far as schooling goes, I think the teacher's observations Hugh Johnson posted in the previous thread were spot on. Education must be de-institutionalized and the way things are taught should be like how things were done at Blake College, in a self-directed and voluntary way. I doubt there would be many behavioral issues in that ideal scenario, if any.
 
Last edited:

michael94

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
2,419
Ask a dog/horse breeder if they think pedigree matters. Acknowledging such doesn't mean he/she stops caring about how the animals are raised. It does not follow that - since environment matters a lot, who breeds with whom doesn't.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom